Posted on 09/21/2007 11:30:49 AM PDT by brent1a
FORT BRAGG, N.C., Sept. 17 — From his position about 100 yards away, Master Sgt. Troy Anderson had a clear shot at the Afghan man standing outside a residential compound in a village near the Pakistan border last October. When Capt. Dave Staffel, the Special Forces officer in charge, gave the order to shoot, Sergeant Anderson fired a bullet into the man’s head, killing him.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Agreed.
Something else must be going on here, for this General to be putting these men to this nightmare.. Unless of course the General is an asshole.... ALL the information to date - would indicate a clean whack.
I agree with you here, too. As I noted above, the only thing that gives me a moment's pause about what's being portrayed in the article, is what the Sgt/paralegal guy said.
I’m “getting snotty” as you so kindly put it because you are behaving as if this hearing is a good thing. A General ordered a hearing for two men who had already been cleared twice of any wrongdoing. This same General RAN to the Washington Post and accused a Company of Special Ops Marines of murder. You seem to think this isn’t a big deal. I really have to wonder about that.
There, that felt good, carry on gentlemen, do what you have to do to win this war.
FN hilarious the way these bozos send their soldiers to war and then turn around and charge the soldiers with murder. ROTFLMAO!!!! That’s not how to win wars!!!! FN America! This country does not deserve the men and women who serve in their military. - Flingwingflyer, truer words have not been spoken.
This was a “good shoot” as they say...
This was a GREAT shoot! ; )
These two Soldiers should be getting medals instead of a trial. Hey, can a lowly female civilian fire this loathsome THREE star poor excuse of a U.S. general?
Haven't been outside of your room much have you?
Your extra special care and consideration for enemy combatants just isn’t worth it.
It is important to maintain some degree of control over the conduct of your troops in order to maintain good order and discipline but putting men on trial for anything other than egregious acts is self defeating.
On the other hand - my Grandfather fought on Guadalcanal among other places - he flew SBD’s. He told me stories about how the fighting got so brutal there that Japanese prisoners were frequently tortured. I mean tortured, body parts cut off etc. It didn’t bother him (the Japanese brought it on themselves) and it certainly doesn’t bother me. War is by definition the breakdown of law. As long as the cause is just I would rather win ugly than lose pretty.
I am not a newbie- but you have never placed yourself in harms way for your country.
Your arguments speak for themselves- shallow and without merit.
In addition you must be an attention Whore because you are trying to get a lot of attention. The 37 replies to you correcting your views out of 107 posts are self evident- girlie man.
You and John Kerry may lose sleep over these cheasy suppositions, but I won't.
There is really no such thing as an "unauthorized, illegal killing" in the middle of that bloody, barbaric war zone in Afghanistan. Our enemies wear no uniforms, they blend in with the civilian population so they can survive and kill us. Fighting these terrorists on their own turf, on their own terms, is an extraoridinarily difficult task. At worst, there are mistakes, but this type of warfare is not a sanitary, clinically clean affair. You might ask yourself how YOU would fare in the midst of the worst of the warfare in Afghanistan.
Before I accuse a beloved Green Beret of 'murdering' a suspected enemy, THIS American will reflect upon the three thousand Americans who were murdered on 9/11/01 by islamofacists, and will remind himself of why we went to war in Afghanistan in the first place. I THANK that Green Beret for fighting for me, my family and my nation.
THE ONLY "UNAUTHORIZED, ILLEGAL KILLINGS" THAT TAKE PLACE IN AFGHANISTAN ARE WHEN U.S. OR COALITION FORCES GET MURDERED BY ISLAMOFACISTS. Let those killings trouble you, son, and leave the Green Berets alone to do their job. You are watching too many Hollywood movies and don't have a clue.
I think you misunderstood my meaning. I don’t believe that the US army does any of those things, or (probably)should do any of them. What I was trying to say is that the Afghans (and Muslims in general)will only respect the ruthless. When they see us trying our own soldiers they’re going to think we’re a bunch of pussies.
Not me. I’d sh!t myself if I were in combat. That’s why I have such gratitude for those violent men who make it possible for me to sleep safe in my warm bed every night. That’s why I hate to see their careers ruined because they did their job.
In WW2, the standard in a war zone would be, if the soldier reasonably could consider the target to be a legitimate target, then he was justified in taking the shot. It was only when the target could NOT be reasonably considered to be a likely enemy that an investigation would occur. I think we need to go back to that, and to hell with what the MSM thinks about it
I don’t give a damn how we kill the enemy how we question the enemy or how we win as long as we win. Leave our soldiers alone and they’ll mop the enemy up.
LOL! Well, no. Your ego has apparently gotten in the way of noticing that we're probably 98% in agreement. I've never claimed that what these guys did was anything other than OK.
But at the same time, there's that 2% doubt: what if there's something real behind this? I don't think there is, but what if there is? And so I asked the question: if there's anything to it, what should happen?
You're reacting to the fact that I'm willing to voice the 2% doubt. The question is: do you have more than bluster to address it? Apparently not.
Agreed ... and it sounds like that's the case here. I don't know what it is that would lead the Kearney and others to conclude otherwise -- there'd have to be some really serious discrepancies with respect to the story told here, and I have to doubt there are.
I think we need to go back to that, and to hell with what the MSM thinks about it.
Actually, that's one of the interesting things here: the roles are a bit reversed from what you're saying.
I generally agree with your comment, but in this article, the only people who are talking to the MSM are the two Green Berets' lawyers, and the MSM has written a fairly sympathetic article on that basis.
And it is the Army (or at least some people in the Army) who are the ones causing the ruckus about this particular killing.
So you’re not going to answer the question. ‘bout what I expected.
Thanks for the reply
I stand corrected
I must have missed something but I think you have written the wrong person. It would appear you need to write the 2% PC idiot, r9ethb, as he pretends to care about our soldiers.
There have been 40 response to this guys Moveon.org viewpoints.
Sorry
You are a phoney - you have never served this country- you have never been in harms way for this country.
Answer why there are 40 negative respones to your Moveon.org approach to the issue of the General’s charges.
You are a plant and you have no idea of what you are writing about.
Return to the leftist sites from where you come from.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.